Technology is becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. In the not too distant future, technology will completely replace the teacher in the classroom. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The use of technology is increasing rapidly in the modern world. Growing technological influence can even be seen in the classroom. Despite this, it is disagreed that technology will completely replace the classroom teacher in the foreseeable future. Analyzing the inability of a technology-driven teacher to both cater to student learning needs and instill motivation will show this.
Firstly, a teacher powered by artificial intelligence would have difficulty interpreting the educational needs of a classroom of students. For example, Honda Asimov, one of the world’s most advanced robots, has trouble distinguishing simple human emotions. If today’s most advanced artificial intelligence cannot categorize these basic physical cues, it is difficult to believe that a robot could be capable of altering study plans and teaching styles in a dynamic classroom setting. Thus, this makes it clear that a technology-driven teacher is not going to be operational anytime in the near future.
Secondly, a robotic teacher would not be able to establish the emotional connection needed to motivate students. The American scientific theory of education plays a good example here. This widely supported theory argues that young learners are most motivated when they share an emotional relationship with their instructor. As most would agree expecting children to form emotional ties to machinery is unrealistic, the argument that technology will replace the teacher in the classroom can be debunked.
In summary, a robotic teacher would lack the classroom dynamism and emotional intelligence needed to be an effective instructor. Thus, it is clear why having a class run entirely by a machine is an idea that will not be realized anytime soon. It is predicted that computer technology will not replace traditional human teachers in the foreseeable future.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, still, thus, for example, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 7.85571142285 165% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 41.998997996 69% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1590.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 283.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.6183745583 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1922504773 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 176.041082164 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.558303886926 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 504.0 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0360275314 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 106.682146367 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8666666667 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 7.06120827912 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.320678047563 0.244688304435 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124329341044 0.084324248473 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118368641117 0.0667982634062 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213418182733 0.151304729494 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.119460908483 0.056905535591 210% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 50.2224549098 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.